SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(Guj) 126

J.N.BHATT
GUJARAT MAZDOOR PANCHAYAT – Appellant
Versus
CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER,delhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: J.D.AJMERA, MANISH R.BHATT, N.R.SAHANI

J. N. BHATT, J.

( 1 ) WHAT is the real connotation of expressions "same" or "similar" work and ambit and extent of the statutory functions of the Chief Labour commissioner (Central) are the significant and substantial questions raised for the consideration and adjudication in this writ petition.

( 2 ) BY this petition, the petitioner-Union has challenged the order passed by respondent, Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), on 17-4-1996, recorded in exercise of the powers contained under Rule 25 (2) (v) (a) of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Central Rules, 1971, (Rules ).

( 3 ) PETITIONER is a registered Trade Union registered under the Trade Unions act, 1926. Petitioner has got substantial membership in the factory of respondent no. 2, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, at Baroda, (I. O. C. ). Petitioner-Union filed special Civil Application No. 566 of 1996 on 18-1-1996, wherein, this Court had passed an interim order directing the Government to take decision with regard to pending Failure Reports and also the complaint under Rule 25, on 26-2-1996. There was a direction in terms of prayer clause 10 (F) of that petition, whereby, during the pendency and final disposal of that






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top